Accessibility AI vs Aiact

In-depth architectural comparison of the Accessibility AI and Aiact MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose Accessibility AI when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Accessibility AI Details

A

Choose Aiact when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: scan_project, quick_check, generate_inventory.

Explore Aiact Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Accessibility AI Developer Tools	A Aiact Developer Tools
Summary	Scan URLs for WCAG 2.1 violations, generate AI fixes, and produce VPAT 2.5 compliance reports.	Scan codebases for AI usage, classify risk, generate EU AI Act compliance reports.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "accessibility-ai": {
      "url": "https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfRsgE_-xFmkuwtMhmVHJULcvfY4y8SNw81iEJJxJREra6t7Q/viewform?usp=publish-editor"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "aiact": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "gridwork-aiact"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons